Cass County Republicans

Lift High the [Bladensburg] Cross: Supreme Court Decision is a Win!

5K

0

5K

There is welcome news today from the Supreme Court.

A 94-year-old war memorial in Bladensburg County, Maryland, can remain in place, despite the demands of the American Humanist Association to tear it down.

Also known as the “Peace Cross,” the memorial was commissioned and built by the American Legion and mothers of the 49 local men killed serving this country in World War I.

Originally built on private land, the 40-foot-tall structure and the land upon which it rests were taken over by the local government 50 years ago for roadway expansion needs. It now stands in the middle of a traffic circle.

Supreme Court decisions are often long and academic, so here is the ruling in shirt-sleeve English:

In a 7-2 decision, the justices found that the cross in the context of a war memorial has not just a religious connotation, but a secular one as well.

The Court held that under those circumstances, the memorial did not violate the First Amendment’s prohibition against the “establishment of religion.”

Of course it doesn’t.

Neither the memorial, nor the government’s need to acquire it, remotely signals an attempt to push or endorse Christianity as a state religion. That should be obvious to anyone who understands the Memorial’s historical background.

At the same time, the wider the margin of a Supreme Court ruling these days, the more narrow the decision – and the Bladensburg finding from the High Court produced some interesting concurring statements.

Given the complexity of the case, I asked my friend and colleague Bruce Hausknecht, Focus’ legal analyst, to break down the decision. Here are his observations:

Four of the justices (Justice Alito, who wrote the opinion, Roberts, Breyer and Kavanaugh) say the Lemon test (which is used to determine whether or not a law violates the Establishment Clause) doesn’t fit these kinds of cases where historical significance is involved.

But Justice Clarence Thomas goes further and says the Lemon test should be abolished altogether.

Justice Gorsuch and Justice Thomas say the suit should have been dismissed for lack of standing by the Humanist Association. They don’t like the so-called “offended-observer” status often used to allow these challenges.

Want more?

As part of the majority, Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion suggesting the Establishment Clause doesn’t even apply to the states, and even if it did, there’s no coercion here.

Also part of the majority decision, Justice Gorsuch filed his own concurring op that was joined by Justice Thomas.

As expected, Justice Ginsburg filed a dissent, joined by Justice Sotomayor.

Thank you, Bruce!

Indeed, there is a concerted effort today on the part of some to scrub the country’s public squares of any religious symbols, and I’m glad the Supreme Court wrote in favor of retaining them. In the words of Justice Alito, “The Religion Clauses of the Constitution aim to foster a society in which people of all beliefs can live together harmoniously, & the presence of the Bladensburg Cross … where it has stood for so many years is fully consistent with that aim.”

Justice Alito concluded:

“The cross is undoubtedly a Christian symbol, but that fact should not blind us to everything else that the Bladensburg Cross has come to represent. For some, that monument is a symbolic resting place for ancestors who never returned home. For others, it is a place for the community to gather and honor all veterans and their sacrifices for our Nation. For others still, it is a historical landmark. For many of these people, destroying or defacing the Cross that has stood undisturbed for nearly a century would not be neutral and would not further the ideals of respect and tolerance embodied in the First Amendment. For all these reasons, the Cross does not offend the Constitution.”

That’s an abundance of common sense in a world that desperately needs it.

Mark Zuckerberg's Resignation

From Fight For The Future

Enough apologies. Mark Zuckerberg must resign. Under his leadership, Facebook has violated billions of people’s basic rights, harvested and abused our data in nauseating ways, and shown reckless disregard for the human impact of its products.

Zuckerberg has been the sole leader of Facebook for its entire 15 years of existence. In that time, there has been no attempt to move away from a business model reliant on violating user privacy. Facebook’s current business practices are fundamentally at odds with democracy and human rights.

There is no single silver bullet solution that will “fix” Facebook. But we can start by sending a clear message to its shareholders, corporate leadership, and the entire tech industry that we are fed up, and that no one should be immune from facing the consequences of their actions. Ousting Mark Zuckerberg is an important first step toward affecting real change.

Ousting Facebook’s CEO may sound like a long shot, but it’s becoming more possible every day. Last week, one of Facebook’s co-founders wrote a lengthy op-ed in the New York Times arguing that Facebook should be broken up because Zuckerberg has amassed too much power.1 At the same time, civil rights groups announced that they’re organizing shareholders to vote him out as chair of the board.2 And, the FTC is considering holding him personally responsible for the company’s myriad scandals.3

Last week, I published an op-ed in The Guardian listing 25 reasons Mark Zuckerberg should resign, and it’s been widely shared across the Internet.4 If ever there was a time for bold action to force real change in Silicon Valley, it’s now.

Fight for the Future works to protect your rights in the digital age.

Friends,

Tremendous news coming from our state government! I am so excited to announce that House Bill 126 also known as the “Missouri Stands for the Unborn Act” is making its way through the Senate. This is Rep. Nick Schroer’s original bill with several other excellent pro-life bills added to it before it left the House.

You can read the bill text and summary at this linkIn effect, the bill would totally outlaw ALL abortions once a fetal heartbeat has been detected. And, if and when the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, the bill would automatically outlaw any and all abortions. Period.

This legislation has been called the strongest pro-life measures in the entire country, and I am proud to stand by it and fight for it in the halls of our capitol.

For too long, our nation’s leaders have idly sat by as millions of children have been slaughtered. The government allowed legalized murder to take place in our country. It shattered the promises of liberty and justice for all, and completely disregarded the sanctity of life.

But in Missouri, we are joining the rising movement to protect the lives of the unborn. I thank God every day for the progress we are making for protecting children. Thanks to President Trump and his Supreme Court appointments of Neil Gorsuch and Brent Kavanaugh, the dream of a United States without abortion is one step closer to becoming reality.

I pray abortion will soon be a thing of the past in our country. We have made great strides towards being a country that values life, and I will continue to stand with the President and my fellow Conservatives to make that happen.

Sincerely,

Holly Rehder
State Representative

END BIRTH DAY ABORTION

You are no doubt familiar with the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence. The Founders clearly understood that the first inalienable right given to us by God is the right to life:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."

What you might not be as familiar with is the second sentence. It acknowledges that we give our consent to be governed by those we put in power:

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..."

In other words, we are yoked together with those who lead us... and we bear the blessing or the curse that comes from decisions made by our leaders.

Let me get right to my question. Do you give your consent to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic House and others who are working to change state and federal laws to allow killing babies on the day of their birth?

If not, together we must stand up.

Through the End Birth Day Abortion Campaign, FRC is mobilizing thousands of Americans to make a national statement--by sending thousands of newborn baby hats to Capitol Hill.

It started with a vicious push for the Reproductive Health Act (RHA) by Governor Cuomo (D-N.Y.) His dedication to the pro-abortion agenda was so extreme, he gave an ultimatum to the legislature: he would not approve a budget for New York until they passed the RHA.

With pro-abortion Democrats taking over the State Senate in the 2018 midterms, he had the allies he needed to enact his grisly scheme. (Elections really do have consequences.)

Governor Cuomo signed the RHA into law on the 46th memorial of Roe v. Wade. It was no accident that he chose January 22nd, the infamous day in 1973 when the Supreme Court handed down its decision legalizing abortion on demand across the U.S., which has resulted in the deaths of 60 million babies in the womb.

Mainstream media outlets have tried to downplay the significance of the RHA--if they cover it at all. But let's cut through the noise.

Most shocking of all, it removes the 24-week limit, allowing abortions up until birth.

This is all too horrifying to imagine. Yet this is what New York just codified into law.

In response, pro-life leaders in Congress are trying to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act that would require medical professionals to provide life-saving care to all babies who survive an abortion procedure, instead of being killed outside the womb or left to die.

But many Democrats are standing in the way of this commonsense, humane bill.

It's why we are working with a coalition of pro-life groups to launch the End Birth Day Abortion Campaign now, as the 2020 race heats up.

Why? Because not a single one of the announced Democratic presidential candidates has stated any opposition to the radical abortion positions of Governor Cuomo!

We the people must make it known that Planned Parenthood and the pro-abortion lobby do not run this country!

Please join FRC in this fight to remind Congress that babies should be welcomed with a warm hat -- not potential danger by giving your best gift today.

Together, we can flood Capitol Hill with these precious newborn baby hats--a symbol that will be carried on news reports, social media, and in other venues.

Truly, America's moral and spiritual darkness has deepened over the last 46 years. Many in our culture are so blinded that they are incapable of seeing the value of each child created in the image of God.

For just $9, you can join in this fight--covering the cost of one baby hat to Congress.

Your gift will also help us increase the reach of this media and advocacy campaign. This nationwide campaign will cost over $500,000, yet we know there is still a faithful pro-life remnant in this nation.

Because the uncomfortable truth is: Our silence is our consent.

Will we be silent as the Left pushes infanticide, or will we make our voices heard for those who cannot speak for themselves as Scripture (Proverbs 31:8-9) commands us to do?

Political Hay

Everyone Is Smart Except Trump

Dov Fischer

July 18, 2018, 12:05 am

That’s why they all are
billionaires and all got elected president.

It really is quite simple. Everyone
is smart except Donald J. Trump. That’s why they all
are billionaires and all got elected President. Only
Trump does not know what he is doing. Only Trump does
not know how to negotiate with Vladimir Putin.
Anderson Cooper knows how to stand up to Putin. The
whole crowd at MSNBC does. All the journalists do.

They could not stand up to Matt Lauer at NBC. They
could not stand up to Charlie Rose at CBS. They could
not stand up to Mark Halperin at NBC. Nor up to Leon
Wieseltier at the New Republic, nor Jann
Wenner at Rolling Stone, nor Michael Oreskes
at NPR, at the New York Times, or at the
Associated Press. But — oh, wow! — can they ever stand
up to Putin! Only Trump is incapable of negotiating
with the Russian tyrant.

Remember the four years when Anderson Cooper was
President of the United States? And before that — when
the entire Washington Post editorial staff
jointly were elected to be President? Remember?
Neither do I.

The Seedier Media never have negotiated life and
death, not corporate life and death, and not human
life and death. They think they know how to
negotiate, but they do not know how. They go
to a college, are told by peers that they are smart,
get some good grades, proceed to a graduate degree in
journalism, and get hired as analysts. Now they are
experts, ready to take on Putin and the Iranian
Ayatollahs at age 30.

That is not the road to expertise in tough dealing.
The alternate road is that, along the way, maybe you
get forced into some street fights. Sometimes the
other guy wins, and sometimes you beat the intestines
out of him. Then you deal with grown-ups as you
mature, and you learn that people can be nasty, often
after they smile and speak softly. You get cheated a
few times, played. And you learn. Maybe you become an
attorney litigating multi-million-dollar case matters.
Say what you will about attorneys, but those years —
not the years in law school, not the years drafting
legal memoranda, but the years of meeting face-to-face
and confronting opposing counsel — those years can
teach a great deal. They can teach how to transition
from sweet, gentle, diplomatic negotiating to tough
negotiating. At some point, with enough tough-nosed
experience, you figure out Trump’s “The Art of the
Deal” yourself.

Trump’s voters get him because not only is he we, but
we are he. We were not snowflaked-for-life by effete
professors who themselves never had negotiated tough
life-or-death serious deals. Instead we live in the
real world, and we know how that works. Not based on
social science theories, not based on “conceptual
negotiating models.” But based on the people we have
met over life and always will hate. That worst boss we
ever had. The coworker who tried to sabotage us. We
know the sons of bums whom we survived, the dastardly
types who are out there, and we learned from those
experiences how to deal with them. We won’t have John
Kerry soothe us by having James Taylor sing “You’ve
Got a Friend” carols.

The Bushes got us into all kinds of messes. The first
one killed the economic miracle that Reagan had
fashioned. The second one screwed up the Middle East,
where Iraq and Iran beautifully were engaged in
killing each other for years, and he got us mired into
the middle of the muddle. Clinton was too busy with
Monica Lewinsky to protect us from Osama bin Laden
when we had him in our sights. Hillary gave us
Benghazi and more. And Obama and Kerry gave us the
Iran Deal, ISIS run amok, America in retreat. All to
the daily praise of a media who now attack Trump every
minute of every day.

So let us understand a few things:

Negotiating with NATO:

NATO is our friend. They also rip off America. They
have been ripping us off forever. We saved their butts
— before there even was a NATO — in World War I. They
messed up, and 116,456 Americans had to die to save
their butts. Then they messed up again for the next
two decades because West Europeans are effete and so
obsessed with their class manners and their rules of
savoir-faireand their socialist welfare
states and their early retirements that they did not
have the character to stand up to Hitler in the 1930s.
Peace in our time. So they messed up, and we had to
save their butts again. And another 405,399 Americans
died for them during World War II. And then we
had to rebuild them! And we had to station our
boys in Germany and all over their blood-stained
continent. So, hey, we love those guys. We love NATO.

And yet they still rip us off. We pay 4% of our
gigantic gross domestic product to protect them, and
they will not pay a lousy 2% of their GDP towards
their own defense. Is there a culture more
penny-pinching-cheap-and-stingy than the fine
constituents of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization? These cheap baseborn prigs will not pay
their fare. They are too cheap. They expect America to
send boys to die for them in one world war, then
another — hundreds of thousands — and then to pay for
their NATO defense even a century later.

And then they have the temerity to cheat us
further in trade. Long before Trump, they set
up tariffs against us for so many things. If the
average American knew how badly Europe has been
ripping us off for decades with their tariffs, no one
in this country would buy anything European
again. We would say, as a matter of self-respect and
personal pride, “I no longer will buy anything but
American, no matter what it costs.”

Every American President has complained about the
cheating and imbalance — the NATO
penny-pinching-cheapness, the tariff and trade
imbalances. In more recent years, the various Bushes
complained about it. Even Obama complained about it.
But they all did it so gently, so diplomatically. They
would deliver the sermon, just as the pastor
predictably tells the church-goers on Sunday morning
that he is against sin, and the Europeans would sit
quietly and nod their heads — nodding from sleeping,
not from agreeing — and then they would go back out
and sin some more. Another four years of America being
suckered and snookered. All they had to do was give
Obama a Nobel Peace Prize his ninth month in office
and let Kerry ride his bike around Paris.

So Trump did what any effective negotiator would do:
he took note of past approaches to NATO and their
failures, and correctly determined that the only way
to get these penny-pinching-cheap baseborn prigs to
pay their freight would be to bulldoze right into
their faces, stare them right in their glazed eyes
with cameras rolling, and tell them point-blank the
equivalent of: “You are the cheapest penny-pinching,
miserly, stingy, tightwadded skinflints ever. And it
is going to stop on my watch. Whatever it takes from
my end, you selfish, curmudgeonly cheap prigs, you are
going to pay your fair share. I am not being
diplomatic. I am being All-Business: either you start
to pay or, wow, are you in for some surprises! And you
know what you read in the Fake News: I am crazy! I am
out of control! So, lemme see. I know: We will go to
trade war! How do you like that? Maybe we even will
pull all our troops out of Europe. Hmmm. Yeah, maybe.
Why not? Sounds good. Well, let’s see.”

So Trump stuffed it into their quiche-and-schnitzel
ingesting faces. And he convinced them — thanks to
America’s Seedier Media who are the real secret to the
“Legend That is Trump” — that he just might be crazy
enough to go to trade war and to pull American boys
home. They knew that Clinton and Bush x 2 and Kerry
and Hillary and Nobel Laureate Obama never would do
it. But they also know that Trump just might. And if
they think they are going to find comfort and
moderating in his new advisers, John Bolton and Mike
Pompeo, alongside him….

Nuh-uh.

So CNN and the Washington Post and all the
Seedier Media attacked Trump for days: He is destroying the
alliance! He attacks our friends!

Baloney. Obama was the one whom the Left
Echo Chamber… Chamber… Chamber never called out for
attacking our friends — Israel, Britain, so many
others — while cozying up to Hugo Chavez, bowing to
dictators, and dancing the tango for Raul Castro. Trump
is just the opposite: He knows who the friends
are, and he wants to maintain and strengthen those
friendships. It is no different from a parent
telling a 35-year-old son: “I have been supporting you
for thirty-five years. I put you through college by
signing four years and $100,000 in PLUS Loans. You
graduated college fifteen years ago. For fifteen years
I have been asking you nicely to look for a job and to
start contributing. Instead, you sit home all day
playing video games, texting your friends on a
smartphone I pay for, and picking little fuzz balls
out of your navel. So, look, I love you. You are my
flesh and blood. But if you are not employed and
earning a paycheck — and contributing to the cost of
this household — in six months, we are throwing you
out of the house.” That boy is NATO. Trump is Dad. And
all of us have been signing for the PLUS Loans.

Negotiating with Putin

Putin is a bad guy. A really bad guy. He is better
than Lenin. Better than Stalin, Khrushchev, Kosygin,
Brezhnev, Pol Pot, Mao. But he is a really bad guy.

Here’s the thing: Putin is a dictator. He
answers to no one. He does whatever he
wants. If there arises an opponent, that guy dies.
Maybe the opponent gets poked with a poisoned
umbrella. Maybe he gets shot on the street. Maybe the
opponent is forced to watch Susan Rice interviews
telling the world that Benghazi happened because of a
YouTube video seen by nine derelicts in Berkeley and
that Bowe Berghdal served with honor and distinction.
But, one way or another, the opponent dies.

Trump knows this about Putin. And here is what that
means:

If you insult Putin in public, like by telling the
newsmedia just before or after meeting with him that
he is the Butcher of Crimea, and he messed with our
elections, and is an overall jerk — then you will
get nothing behind closed doors from Putin. Putin
will decide “To heck with you, and to heck with the
relationship we just forged.” Putin will get even,
will take intense personal revenge, even if
it is bad for Russia — even if it is bad for Putin.
Because there are no institutional reins on him.

But if you go in public and tell everyone that
Putin is a nice guy (y’know, just like Kim Jong
Un) and that Putin intensely maintains that he did not mess
with elections — not sweet little Putey Wutey (even
though he obviously did) — then you next can
maintain the momentum established beforehand in the
private room. You can proceed to remind Putin
what you told him privately: that this garbage has to
stop — or else. That if he messes in Syria,
we will do “X.” If he messes with our Iran boycott, we
will do “Y.” We will generate so much oil from
hydraulic fracturing and from ANWR and from all our
sources that we will glut the market — if not
tomorrow, then a year from now. We will send even more
lethal offensive military weapons to Ukraine. We can
restore the promised shield to Eastern Europe that
Obama withdrew. And even if we cannot mess with
Russian elections (because they have no elections),
they do have computers — and, so help us, we will mess
with their technology in a way they cannot imagine.
Trump knows from his advisers what we can do. If he
sweet-talks Putin in public — just Putin on the Ritz —
then everything that Trump has told Putin privately
can be reinforced with action, and he even can wedge
concessions because, against that background,
Putin knows that no one will believe that he made
any concessions. Everyone is set to believe
that Putin is getting whatever he wants, that
Trump understands nothing. So, in that setting,
Putin can make concessions and still save face.

That is why Trump talks about him that way.
And that is the only possible way to do it when
negotiating with a tyrant who has no checks and
balances on him. If you embarrass the tyrant publicly,
then the tyrant never will make concessions because he
will fear that people will say he was intimidated and
backed down. And that he never will do. Meanwhile,
Trump has expelled 60 Russians from America, reversed
Obama policy and sent lethal weapons to Ukraine, and
is pressing Germany severely on its pipeline project
with Russia.

The Bottom Line

At the end of the day, Donald Trump is over seventy
years old. He has made many mistakes in his life. He
still makes some. He is human. But Trump likewise has
spent three score and a dozen years learning. He has
seen some of his businesses go bankrupt, and he has
learned from those experiences to be a billionaire and
not let it happen again. No doubt that he has been
fooled, outsmarted in years past. And he has learned
from life.

He is a tough and smart negotiator.
He sizes up his opponent, and he knows
that the approach that works best for
one is not the same as for another. It
does not matter what he says publicly
about his negotiating opponent. What
matters is what results months
later. In his first eighteen
months in Washington, this man has
turned around the American economy,
brought us near full employment,
reduced the welfare and food stamp
lines, wiped out ISIS in Raqqa, moved
America’s Israel embassy to Jerusalem,
successfully has launched massive
deregulation of the economy, has
opened oil exploration in ANWR, is
rebuilding the military massively, has
walked out of the useless Paris
Climate Accords that were negotiated
by America’s amateurs who always get
snookered, canned the disastrous Iran
Deal, exited the bogus United Nations
Human Rights Council. He has Canada
and Mexico convinced he will walk out
of NAFTA if they do not pony up, and
he has the Europeans convinced he will
walk out of NATO if they don’t stop
being the cheap and lazy parasitic
penny-pinchers they are. He has
slashed income taxes, expanded legal
protections for college students
falsely accused of crimes, has taken
real steps to protect religious
freedoms and liberties promised in the
First Amendment, boldly has taken on
the lyme-disease-quality of a
legislative mess that he inherited
from Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama on
immigration, and has appointed a
steady line of remarkably brilliant
conservative federal judges to sit on
the district courts, the circuit
appellate courts, and the Supreme
Court.

What has Anderson Cooper achieved during that period?
Jim Acosta or the editorial staffs of the New York
Times and Washington Post? They have
not even found the courage and strength to stand up to
the coworkers and celebrities within their orbits who
abuse sexually or psychologically or emotionally. They
have no accomplishments to compare to his. Just their
effete opinions, all echoing each other, all echoing,
echoing, echoing. They gave us eight years of Nobel
Peace Laureate Obama negotiating with the ISIS JV
team, calming the rise of the oceans, and healing the
planet.

We will take Trump negotiating with Putin any day.

Derek Richard Moorhead

July 30, 1968 - July 17, 2018

Derek R. Moorhead, age 49, of Raymore, Missouri, passed away at the
University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas City, Kansas on July 17,
2018. A Celebration of Life will be held starting at 5:30 p.m., Monday,
July 30, at Centerview, 227 Municipal Circle, Raymore, MO 64083.

Derek was born on July 30, 1968, in Tachikawa, Japan. He was the son of Richard Wayne Moorhead and Norine Iennaccaro.

On May 29, 1993, Derek married Tasha Kovich. Together, Derek and Tasha shared over twenty-five years of marriage.

Derek obtained his Juris Doctorate in 1996 from the University of
Missouri-Kansas City. Right after school, he clerked for the Honorable
Judge Harold Lowenstein at the Missouri Court of Appeals. Derek spent
his work life as an attorney, professor and politician. He started a
boutique firm, Larsen Moorhead LLC, in 1999 with a fellow law school
classmate. Musson, Moorhead and Rank, LLC, followed in 2003. He then
worked at UMKC as an academic advisor before opening his own private
practice. In January 2015, Derek became the Chief Executive Auditor for
Cass County, MO.

Derek taught classes and led mock-trial teams at Avila University,
Webster University, UMKC, Kansas State University and Washburn
University. While being an attorney was his bread and butter, Derek’s
passion truly was teaching. His students held a special place in his
heart. He learned just as much from them as they did from him. Many of
them he called friends to this day.

Derek also thoroughly enjoyed politics. He took a lot of pride in
working on George W. Bush’s presidential campaign. This led to him
helping with many local campaigns, especially in the roles of treasurer
and advisor. After moving to Raymore 2010, he became involved in the
planning and zoning commission, and then was elected to the City Council
in 2013. He held this office for five years, also becoming the Mayor
Pro Tem in 2015. Derek was designated by the MO Municipal Leagues as a
Certified Municipal Official. He also was selected by the City of
Raymore as a Civic Leader for 2018. As a telling story as to how Derek
approached politics, whenever constituents voiced a concern, he would
show up in person at their front door to discuss the issue. He cared
about his community deeply.

Derek dearly loved spending time with his wife Tasha, daughter
Rebecca and son Mark. Some of his personal pursuits and enjoyments
included: Bloom County, Bruce Springsteen, U2, Comicon, English soccer,
the Tour de France, baseball games, football, sports cards and running
errands on the weekend as a family.

Audit discovery leads to attorney general filing public corruption charges

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Discoveries
made during an ongoing audit of a municipality in Wayne County has led
the Missouri’s Attorney General Office to file public corruption charges
against the former Greenville City Clerk.

Felony criminal charges have been
filed against Pamela S. Birmingham alleging she misappropriated more
than $150,000 as City Clerk and forged an entry in the city’s check
disbursement log.

“There is no place for public
corruption in Missouri,” Attorney General Josh Hawley said. “My office
will vigorously prosecute those who attempt to skirt Missouri law for
personal benefit.”

At the request of the Attorney
General’s Office, the State Auditor’s Office — lead by Nicole Galloway —
conducted an audit of the City of Greenville. The audit is still
ongoing and a report will be publicly released at a later date.

The investigation discovered that
Birmingham unlawfully paid herself at least $150,772.00, nearly
bankrupting the city. Birmingham, who was employed by the City of
Greenville between January 2014 and April 2016, allegedly wrote herself
several checks, without proper authorization, out of various bank
accounts owned by the city.

“I am dedicated to working with law
enforcement to hold corrupt public officials accountable,” said
Galloway. “I appreciate the attention to this issue in asking for my
office’s assistance and expertise in forensic auditing, which led to
today’s charges. We will continue to work with the Highway Patrol and
Attorney General to ensure justice for taxpayers in Greenville.”

The Attorney General’s Public
Corruption Team is prosecuting this case with assistance of the Missouri
State Highway Patrol and the Missouri State Auditor’s Office.

American History in 90 MinutesAnders Odegard

THE CONSTITUTION

An Excerpt

The U.S. Constitution is the Foundation

upon which our Great Nation is Built.

The 1776 Declaration of Independence marked the birth of a new nation. This birth brought a whole new host of questions to the forefront. What form of government would lead this new nation? Would this new entity take the form of one united nation or several independent nations? The resolution of these questions was made all the more urgent by the fact that the survival of the young nation hinged on its ability to defeat a European superpower in war.

The Continental Congress served as the federal government of the colonies (states) during the War of Independence. After independence was declared in the summer of 1776, it was decided that the role of the federal government should be defined more clearly. In March 1781, the Articles of Confederation were adopted.

The Articles of Confederation: The Articles of Confederation documented the rights and duties of the federal government. The federal government was to be run by the Congress, in which each of the states had one vote. The Congress had the right to vote on matters such as declaring war, negotiating treaties with other nations, and borrowing money. However, Congress was not given the power to levy taxes, to regulate domestic or international trade, or to enforce its own laws. The Articles of Confederation, in fact, provided for a very weak federal government. This weakness was by design. The colonists feared that establishing a strong, centralized government would bring back the same kind of tyranny, albeit in a different form, which they had experienced with the British.

The Articles of Confederation sufficed during the war. The largely autonomous states were united by the wrath they shared for a common enemy. Each state, more or less, did its part voluntarily to contribute to the war effort.

However, united in war, the states grew increasingly divided in peace. States became embroiled in border disputes with each other. They enacted tariffs on interstate trade which hindered commerce and resulted in post-war economic stagnation. The states quit contributing funds to the federal government. Unable to raise taxes on its own, Congress could not support its army. Also lacking a strong central government, the United States was unable to conduct effective foreign policy.

Shays' Rebellion: To pay off its war debts, Massachusetts implemented large increases in its property taxes following the war. These taxes were particularly hard on the state's many small farmers who were already being hurt by the weakeconomy. Those who were unable to pay their taxes and other debts faced the possibility of having their farms repossessed. These small farmers, many of whom had fought in the War of Independence, grew angry. They had not worked this hard and fought a war for the privilege of becoming homeless. In the autumn of 1786 the farmers began to organize. In January 1787, over 1,000 farmers led by army veteran Daniel Shays stormed the arsenal at Springfield, Massachusetts.

What could have developed into civil war in Massachusetts was easily squelched by the state militia. Those identified as leaders of the rebellion were tried, convicted, and then pardoned by a state legislature which had become sympathetic with their concerns. As a result of the rebellion, laws were changed to help alleviate the plight of the Massachusetts farmers.

More importantly, Shays' Rebellion caused Americans to begin thinking about law and order. Although the rebellion was successfully put down by the state militia, people questioned as to whether future rebellions in other states could be halted so easily. If civil war broke out in one state, would it spread to neighboring states? Also, if the individual states had trouble keeping the peace locally, what chance would they have of warding off an attack from another nation such as Spain, France, or Britain?

The Constitutional Convention: Americans grew to realize that their survival depended upon establishing a stronger central government, one which could keep order and provide for the common defense. In May 1787, delegates from the states met in Philadelphia at the Constitutional Convention. Presided over by George Washington, the delegates assumed the monumental task of designing a new federal government.

The delegates met for four straight months, during which time they brainstormed, presented their ideas, argued, and compromised. Finally, on September 17, 1787, the delegates signed the final draft of the Constitution. The delegates, who had conducted their meetings with the utmost secrecy, were now ready to present the fruits of their labor to the American public.

The Constitution: The Constitution defined the duties and limitations of the new federal government. It provided for three branches of government: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. Each branch would operate independently and have certain checks on the powers granted to the otherbranches. For example, only the legislative branch would have the ability to pass laws, but the executive branch could veto laws passed by the legislative branch, and the judicial branch could rule laws unconstitutional (an implied power). In turn, the legislative branch would have the power to remove the head of the executive branch, the President, or any judge in the judicial branch through the power of impeachment. In the eyes of the architects of the Constitution, this system of checks and balances would prevent any one branch of the federal government from growing too powerful.

The Constitution also defined the relationship between the federal government and the states. Under the Articles of Confederation, each state had the right to regulate and tax interstate and foreign trade. The Constitution stipulated that these rights be taken away from the states and given to the new federal government. The states would also lose their right to print money. The states would retain most of their rights to regulate intrastate activities, provided their actions did not contradict the Constitution.

The Connecticut Compromise: In return for turning over many of their powers to the new federal government, the states would select who served in this government. A major point of controversy in the Constitutional Convention was the degree of representation each state would receive. The less populous states wanted each state to have equal representation. Predictably, the more populous states desired proportional representation based on population. The Connecticut Compromise addressed the concerns of both parties by providing for two bodies of Congress. In one, the House of Representatives, each state would be allotted seats based on population. For example, a state with five times the population of another would receive five times the number of congressional seats. In the other legislative body, the Senate, states would be allotted two seats each, regardless of population. The head of the executive branch, the President, would be elected by the states, with each state having the number of electoral votes equal to its total number of senators and representatives. Presidents would serve four-year terms. An indecisive Presidential election would result in the House of Representatives electing the President.

The Three-Fifths Compromise: Many of the northern delegates to the Constitutional Convention wanted to use the document to outlaw slavery throughout the states. The southern delegates made it clear that they would not be part of a Union in which the right of individuals to own slaves was abridged.Consequently, language was included in the Constitution which protected the property rights of slaveholders. Additionally, since slaves constituted a substantial portion of the southern population, the southern delegates demanded that slaves be counted in the census for the purpose of awarding seats in the House of Representatives. The Northerners, arguing that the Southerners themselves considered slaves as property, believed slaves should not be counted. In the end the two sides compromised, agreeing to count each slave as three-fifths of a person when determining the population of a given state for allotting House seats. Ironically and disgustingly, by their mere existence, southern slaves helped to bolster the political power of their owners, power their owners would use to ensure these slaves would remain slaves well into the future.

Suffrage Rights: The U.S. Constitution remained silent as to who would be allowed to participate in the electoral process, preferring to leave this issue to the individual states. As a result, white males, who dominated the state governments in the late 1780s, continued to extend the right of suffrage to their fellow white males. Black men would not be enfranchised with the vote until the latter half of the nineteenth century. Women, black or white, would not be guaranteed the right to vote until 1920.

The Amendment Process: The writers of the Constitution wisely realized that its survival would depend on its ability to adapt to the times. Consequently, a mechanism was outlined in Article V of the Constitution by which amendments could be made to the Constitution. Approval of at least 75% of the states in the nation are required to ratify any amendment to the Constitution. The amendment process was designed to be arduous in order to dissuade the passage of trivial amendments. However, if it became clear to the people of the United States that a change in the Constitution was necessary, that change could be made without discarding the entire document.

The Bill of Rights: One weakness of the U.S. Constitution was that it was largely silent on issues of individual rights and freedoms. The drafters of the Constitution intended originally for such issues to be left to the individual states. However, when the delegates to the Constitutional Convention went out to sell their document to the American public, it became clear the public wanted certain individual liberties guaranteed at the federal level.

In 1789 Virginian James Madison proposed twelve amendments to the Constitution. Of these, ten were ratified. These first ten amendments to the U.S.Constitution became known as the Bill of Rights. The individual liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are summarized as follows:

First Amendment: Freedom of religion, speech, and the press. Individuals have the right to assemble peaceably and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Second Amendment: The right to keep and bear arms.

Third Amendment: Freedom from having troops quartered in one's home.

Fourth Amendment: Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.

Fifth Amendment: The right not to be denied life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The right not to be tried twice for the same offense. Exempts individual from testifying against self.

Sixth Amendment: The right to a speedy, public trial. The right to be informed of charges pending. The right to defense counsel and to call witnesses on one's behalf. The right to face accusers.

Seventh Amendment: The right to trial by jury.

Eighth Amendment: Freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.

Ninth Amendment: Provides for individual rights not explicitly stated in the Constitution.

Tenth Amendment: Powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved for the states and the people.

In June 1788, the Constitution was adopted as the law of the land. The Bill of Rights was added in 1791. Elections were held in early 1789. In April 1789, the newly elected representatives, senators, and the nation's first President, George Washington, took their places in the capital of the United States, New York City.

A clash between two inimical worldviews is taking place in America: Biblical Christianity vs. secular humanism.
In order to dominate, secular humanists had to find a way to exercise
complete control over the five levers of cultural influence: spiritual,
intellectual, educational, economical and vocational.

Secular lawyers can be unflaggingly persistent as well as
ruthlessly devious. They determined that to banish the Judeo-Christian
culture from the public square, the Bible had to be expunged from public
education first. Theological principles and debate then could be
relegated to the recesses of the conscience, and safely lodged behind
the four walls of the church. As a consequence, public education, higher
learning and academia have become ever-more intertwined with the state.

It was completely different in the 17th and 18th centuries. Public education and higher learning “had
its roots in American Protestantism, in fact 106 of the 108 colleges
were distinctly Christian. It was while the First Amendment was passed,
requiring all new states entering the Union to have education systems in
place emphasizing the teaching of both religion and morality.”(1)

Someone’s morality will be legislated and someone’s philosophy will be taught in public schools and universities, “for those who govern the minds of the young, direct the course of the future of civilization.”(2)
For this reason, under the influence of pagan Secularism, the culture
has become gruff, debauched and vitriolic over the last 75 years.

Corporate Christianity should have countered Secularism’s attack by
going full tilt to where the battle was fiercest, engaging the hard
fight in the public square. While increasingly moving into the
meetinghouse seemed good strategy at the time, it has been shortsighted
and ineffectual. With Christian retreat from the public square, Western
culture is rushing headlong into apostasy from the Triune God.

Christianity today hardly resembles
the muscular faith, honed by persecution, that arrived at America’s
shores. Modern Christendom has near zero impact in the culture as it has
become progressively esoteric and academic. It has been reduced to a
subculture.

The Southern Baptist Convention had its annual meeting last week in Dallas.

Progressive liberals have no intention of letting up. Take Hillary
Clinton’s homily last week over Congress’s inaction at the southern
border. “Those who selectively use the
Bible to justify this cruelty are ignoring a central tenet of
Christianity … [Jesus] did not say, ‘Let the children suffer’,” she pontificated. (https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1008773597287116802)

Indeed, Jesus did not say that. The
Greek word ‘ἄφετε’ is used, which translates as ‘let’, as in “Let the
little children, and do not forbid them …” Jesus is saying, allow and do
not forbid children from learning my teachings. Yet, forbidden they are
in public education by the law established in 1963 by nine unelected
and unaccountable Justices. This is diametrically opposed to the
intention and foundation laid down by the American Founders.

Hillary Clinton employed the use of a Bible verse totally out of context to make a ‘policy’ argument.
This shows one of several things about her. Either she is: (1)
Biblically illiterate, (2) duplicitous, or (3) both; you choose.

Not to be outdone, MSNBC Anchor and Business Correspondent Ali Velshi also took to the Good Book. (twitter.com/obianuju/status/1007940931897712640) Mr.
Velshi, being a Muslim, obviously does not understand that
cherry-picking a few selected verses from the Bible does not convey the
real meaning of Jesus’ teachings.

In his Gleanings from Joshua(3), A.W. Pink writes: “The
deception which the Gibeonites practiced upon them illustrates the dual
character in which Satan opposes the people of God and the methods he
employs therein - as the roaring lion seeking to devour, as the subtle
serpent using deceit. Both Scriptural and ecclesiastical history
demonstrate that the latter is far more dangerous and successful than
the former. When open persecution fails either to exterminate or
intimidate the faithful,” (read: Obama Administration) “Satan resorts to his secret wiles.” (read: Hillary Clinton and Ali Velshi)

If America is to survive, Evangelical pastors and pews must take
their civic skills to the next level. We were granted a reprieve with
President Trump. A Hillary Clinton presidency would have set back
America for a century by, among others, stacking the Courts with godless
progressives. Would we even have survived, keeping in mind that the
loss of religious liberty, the loss of the right to keep and bear arms,
and President Obama’s transgender military policy were just the warm-up
acts?

Pastors must begin to comprehend that religious liberty will be won by participating in political action, in addition to Sunday sermons. A Sunday sermon is not a denomination of political currency. Mustering and marshaling parishioners to the public square is.
The teaching of the whole counsel of God in America’s pulpits, the
resurrection of prayer in America’s churches, and Evangelical and
Pro-Life Catholic Christians bringing Biblical values to the public
square will determine if America remains free.

If successful, history will declare that the early 21st century was one of the most momentous periods in HisStory since the 16th-century Protestant Reformation.

"The name of Christians being extinguished"

Nothing
could be further from the truth than what comes across as a contest
between Democrats and Republicans. In reality, two distinct and
immutable religions - Christianity and Secularism - are vying for
ideological supremacy in the public square. A better labeling would
read:America is smack-dab in the middle of a ‘cultural civil war’.Eventually, one worldview will triumph over the other.

This is by no means a new historical phenomenon, as Spurgeon informs us:

“A medal was struck by Diocletian, which still remains, bearing the inscription, ‘The name of Christians being extinguished’.And in Spain, [a] monumental pillar [was] raised, on which [was] written:‘Diocletian
Jovian Maximian Herculeus Caesares Augusti, for having adopted Galerius
in the east, for having everywhere abolished the superstition of
Christ, for having extended the worship of the gods.’ As a modern writer
has elegantly observed: ‘We have here a monument raised by Paganism,
over the grave of its vanquished foe. But in this ‘the people imagined a
vain thing’; so far from being deceased, Christianity was on the eve of
its final and permanent triumph, and the stone guarded a sepulcher
empty as the urn that Electra washed with her tears. Neither in Spain,
nor elsewhere, can be pointed out the burial place of Christianity; it
is not, for the living have no tomb.’”[1]

Modern Christendom is inclined to blame“humanists,
pagans and Muslims, Marxists or other groups for the state of our
culture and its idolatrous turn, but God calls His people to first take a
long hard look at themselves in accounting for the decline of our
social order.”[2]

America’s Founders understood the basic fact thatvirtue and liberty are inseparably linked, and that freedom“cannot long be preserved in the absence of virtue among the people and their representatives.”[3]

Liberty depends upon virtue, and virtue depends upon Christianity.

These truths have now been stripped from government-controlled education.Christians have surrendered the ministry of civil government to secularists, who are in rebellion against God. Secularism has brought to bear its own religious, ethical, and political doctrines in America.[4]

Under the influence of pietism the scope of spiritual engagement in America has been reduced to“his or her personal life, family life, and the affairs of the church as an ecclesiastical organization.”[5]No wonder that Secularism managed to hijack the Founders’ master plan.

Americans want God’s help, but not His holiness.The
nation reckons that it is useful to have God on its side. To honor God,
to all appearances, we attend church on Christmas and Easter, say a
prayer for the right parking spot, or ask the pastor to bless a marriage
or a new home. But what we really want is a God who will help us to get
our own way. We call for a God to help us getting things done, as long
as we can keep our own views and live our own lives.[6]

As
a result, America has reached a tipping point as God is beginning to
assign His time-tested veterans to the front ranks. This battle for the
Soul of America will unfold over the next thirty years, and God’s plans
are not transparent.

A.W. Pink describes the spirit and training of those whom God is moving to the frontlines.[7]

“It
is this very loneliness of the saint that serves to make manifest the
genuineness of his faith. There is nothing remarkable in one believing
what all his associates believe, but to have faith when surrounded by
skeptics, is something noteworthy. To stand alone, to be the solitary
champion of a righteous cause when all others are federated unto evil,
is a rare sight. Yet such was Rahab. There were none in Jericho with
whom she could have fellowship, none there to encourage her heart and
strengthen her hands by their godly counsel and example: all the more
opportunity for her to prove the sufficiency of Divine grace! Scan
slowly the list presented in Hebrews 11, and then recall the recorded
circumstances of each. With whom did Abel, Enoch, Noah have spiritual
communion? From what brethren did Joseph, Moses, Gideon receive any help
along the way? Who were the ones who encouraged and emboldened Elijah,
Daniel, Nehemiah? Then think it not strange that you are called to walk
almost if not entirely alone, that you meet with scarcely any
like-minded or any who are capable of giving you a lift along the road.”

Secularism’s destruction of America’s once Biblically-based culture can be counteracted by:

• Reestablishing prayer in America’s churches, led by the senior pastor.

• Men and Women of Issachar running for local office: city council, school board, parks and recreation, etc.

[Please note that filing deadlines in many parts of the country takes place in June.Pastors who don’t feel called to run are requested to recruit a member of their congregation.]

Gideons and Rahabs are now moving toward the civil government frontline. “It
will require courage, fortitude and unwavering biblical faithfulness to
rouse the church again to her mission in a generation that has lost its
way in idolatry, and where a many prophet and priest have said ‘peace
peace, when there is no peace’(Jeremiah 6:14).”[8]

David Lane

American Renewal Project

[1] The Treasury of David, Charles H. Spurgeon

[2-3] Joseph Boot, The Mission of God, A Manifesto Of Hope For Society

[4]
Archie P. Jones, Foreward to The Christian Life and Character Of The
Civil Institutions Of The United States, Benjamin F. Morris, 1864

Just in case some of you didn’t know this. It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what's what and it doesn't matter whether you are Democrat or Republican Facts are Facts.

Social
Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the United States
now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,
No longer Voluntary
2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,
Now 7.65% on the first $90,000
3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,
No longer tax deductible

4.) That the money the
participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,
Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal
government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting
the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the
Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age
65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA),
the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of
awareness will be planted and maybe changes will
evolve.
But it's worth a try.
How many people can YOU send this to?

Actions speak louder than bumper stickers

Closing This Chapter on Barack Obama

As we close the chapter and book on President Barack Hussein Obama's stewardship of America, one has to ask,"What has political correctness, multiculturalism, and secularism wrought in America?"

A
democratic republic, in which ultimate authority and power is derived
from the citizens, is viable only if people can, on the whole, rely on
our elected officials to tell the truth. I have nothing to add to what
I've written over the last eight years on President Obama, so I'll end
with this memorable insight from Mark Steyn:

Courtesy
of David Maraniss' new book, we now know that yet another key prop of
Barack Obama's identity is false: His Kenyan grandfather was not
brutally tortured or even non-brutally detained by his British colonial
masters. The composite gram'pa joins an ever-swelling cast of characters
from Barack's"memoir"who,
to put it discreetly, differ somewhat in reality from their bit parts
in the grand Obama narrative. The best friend at school portrayed in
Obama's autobiography as "a symbol of young blackness" was, in
fact, half Japanese, and not a close friend. The white girlfriend he
took to an off-Broadway play that prompted an angry post-show exchange
about race never saw the play, dated Obama in an entirely different time
zone, and had no such world-historically significant conversation with
him. His Indonesian step-grandfather, supposedly killed by Dutch
soldiers during his people's valiant struggle against colonialism, met
his actual demise when he"fell off a chair at his home while trying to hang drapes."

Wisdom
(practical, and by extension ethical) is required now as we clean up
the mess left by Obama and his subordinates; and the secularists who
came before them.

The
disintegration of this once Biblical-based culture - established by the
Founders - has resulted in the desolation and demise of a nation
founded by missionaries and Gospel-minded colonists who wrote words like
this:"We
do hereby Dedicate this Land, and ourselves, to reach the People within
these shores with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and to raise up Godly
generations after us, and with these generations take the Kingdom of God
to all the earth. May this Covenant of Dedication remain to all
generations, as long as this earth remains..."**

The
Bible formed the principal component of education in America for three
centuries. Biblically informed minds know that the fear of God in one's
conscience is the only thing that keeps a person honest, honorable, and
doing right when no one is watching.

In 1963, secular U.S. Supreme Court Justices established a false religion - Secularism- as the official religion of America. That decision led lone dissenting Justice Potter Stewart to pen, "It
[the decision to remove the Bible from public schools] led not to true
neutrality with respect to religion, but to the establishment of a
religion of secularism."Potter was prophetic.

If
Evangelical and Pro-Life Catholic Christians have any interest in
reclaiming a Biblical-based culture, then restoring local control of
public education is compulsory.

"If the culture's
liberal, if the schools are liberal, if the churches are liberal, if the
hip, groovy business elite is liberal, if the guys who make the movies
and the pop songs are liberal, then electing a guy with an 'R' after his
name isn't going to make a lot of difference."-Mark Steyn

Madonna's performance Saturday at
the Women's March in Washington, DC, brought to mind Abraham Lincoln's
Young Men's Lyceum speech in January 1838. Lincoln said:

"At
what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if
it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from
abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and
finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die
by suicide."

Or as my friend Os Guinness wrote:

"The
free people of the American republic, who also happen to be citizens of
the modern world's sole superpower, have no one to blame and nothing to
fear but themselves. There is no question about the earlier menace of
the Nazis and Communists, and now Islamic extremists, but in the end the
ultimate threat to the American republic will be Americans. The problem
is not wolves at the door but termites in the floor. Powerful free
people die only by their own hand, and free people have no one to blame
but themselves. What the world seems fascinated to watch but powerless
to stop is the spectacle of a free people's suicide."***

Evangelical
and Pro-Life Catholic Christians have sat idly by for the last century,
as with public education, and allowed secularists to hold sway over the
most important aspects of American society - media, public education,
higher learning, Big Business, Fortune 500, the Supreme Court, Federal
Courts, and Hollywood - they must be dislodged if America is to survive.

John
Adams would often use Greek words in his letters to Thomas Jefferson,
who admired many aspects of the Ancient Greeks. He could read and speak
the language fluently.

When Alexander
Hamilton entered King’s College (now Columbia University) in 1773, he
was expected to already have a mastery of Greek and Latin grammar, be
able to read three orations from Cicero and Virgil’s Aeneid in the
original Latin, and be able to translate the first ten chapters of the
Gospel of John from Greek into Latin.

When
James Madison applied at the College of New Jersey (now Princeton), he
was expected to be able to “write Latin prose, translate Virgil, Cicero,
and the Greek gospels and [to have]a commensurate knowledge of Latin
and Greek grammar.” Even before he entered, however, he had already read
Vergil, Horace, Justinian, Nepos, Caesar, Tacitus, Lucretius,
Eutropius, Phaedrus, Herodotus, Thucydides, and Plato.

The
study of Latin and Greek, which is what the term “classical education”
originally implied, was not something the American Founding Fathers
learned in college, but something they were expected to know before they
got there.

The founders knew these writers
and quoted them prolifically. Their letters, in particular, display a
wide familiarity with classical authors. The correspondence between
educated men of the time was commonly sprinkled with classical
quotations, usually in the original Latin or Greek. It was not only
prevalent, but apparently sometimes annoying to the recipient. Jefferson
used so many Greek quotes in his letters to Adams (who liked Latin
better than Greek) that, on one occasion, Adams complained to him about
it.

It is a well-known fact that literacy
was prevalent in colonial times. “A native of America who cannot read or
write,” said John Adams, “is as rare an appearance…as a comet or an
earthquake.” It is not nearly as well-known a fact, however, that early
Americans with a formal education usually knew several other languages
as well as their own.

The typical education
of the time began in what we would call the 3rd Grade—at about age
eight. Students who actually went to school were required to learn Latin
and Greek grammar and, later, to read the Latin historians Tacitus and
Livy, the Greek historians Herodotus and Thucydides, and to translate
the Latin poetry of Virgil and Horace. They were expected to know the
language well enough to translate from the original into English and
back again to the original in another grammatical tense. Classical
Education also stressed the seven liberal arts: Latin, logic, rhetoric
(the “trivium”), as well as arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music
(the “quadrivium”).

Several of the
founders, including Adams, attended Harvard. The sole academic
requirements for admission to Harvard University in the 1640s were as
follows: “When any scholar is able to read Tully [Cicero] or such like
classical Latin author ex tempore and make and speak true Latin in verse
and prose suo (ut aiunt) Marte [by his own power, as they say], and
decline perfectly the paradigms of nouns and verbs in the Greek tongue,
then may he be admitted into the college, nor shall any claim admission
before such qualification.”

No ACT or SAT scores. No application essays. Just proof you knew Latin and Greek.

Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, 30 of them were college graduates, an astounding number for the time.

But
what of those who were not college graduates, such as George
Washington? Were they influenced in any way by classical education? In
Washington’s case, although he had little formal education, he admired
classical thinkers greatly.

Even many who
had little formal education were often quite knowledgeable in classical
subjects. The Virginian George Wythe, who later became known as the
“Teacher of Liberty,” was educated at their backwoods home by his
mother. His Greek was accounted by his contemporaries to have been
perfect.

Of course there were also those opposed to the influence of the Classical languages.

There
was much antipathy toward the British and some colonists— new
Americans— wanted to dump the English language simply out of spite.
There reportedly were a few superpatriots who argued for adopting
Hebrew, French or Greek because they were the languages of God,
rationality and democracy, respectively.

Although
there are numerous “rumors” floating around the internet about Greek
“almost” becoming the official language of the United States and the
vote coming down to one Benjamin Franklin, who argued against it and
casting the deciding the final “no” vote— there is nothing in US
historical records to prove this, or that a vote ever took place.

But, it was discussed amongst the founding fathers, according to several written sources.

A
19th century American writer and scholar Charles Astor Bristed wrote in
1855 that there was talk amongst the founding fathers, some of whom
were proposing Greek be the official American language.

“It
is still on record that a legislator seriously proposed that the young
republic should complete its independence by adopting a different
language from that of the mother country, [like]‘the Greek for
instance.’ But this proposition was summarily extinguished by a
suggestion of a fellow representative (Roger Sherman of Connecticut,
delegate to the Continental Congress and a member of the committee that
drafted the Declaration of Independence) that “it would be more
convenient for us to keep the language as it was, and make the English
speak Greek.”

William "Bill" Martin Day, of Harrisonville, Missouri was born December 22, 1920 in Dexter, Missouri the son of Cecil Leroy and Katherine Pauline (Kleffer) Day. He departed this life on Saturday, August 27, 2016 at the Crown Care Center, Harrisonville surrounded by love and family at the age of 95 years, 8 months and 5 days.

Bill grew up in rural Stoddard County near Dexter and came to love agriculture. Following graduation from Dexter High School in 1939, he attended the University of Missouri. He also taught rural school in 1941-42 at Garner School near Dexter. He graduated from MU with a bachelor's degree in Agriculture in 1943 and a master's degree in Education in 1953.

He met Verda Bernice Peterson his final year at the university. They had a whirlwind courtship and married on September 2, 1943. There was a wedding shower on the 4th, and Bill reported to his first job as a vocational agriculture teacher at Advance, Missouri on the 5th. That was followed by two years teaching at Washington, Missouri and then on to teaching vocational agriculture in Harrisonville beginning in 1948. He also farmed near East Lynne, Missouri before moving to Harrisonville in 1950. Following his retirement from teaching in 1967, Bill had a very successful second career selling insurance for Farm Bureau Insurance Company and as Agency Manager in Harrisonville for over 20 years.

Bill was a member of the Harrisonville United Methodist Church and taught Sunday School for many years. He was also a member of the Harrisonville Lions Club since 1955 and Past President, Cass County Republican Committee and Club, member and Past President of the Missouri Vocational Agricultures Teachers Association. Bill enjoyed many hobbies over the years. They included hunting, fishing, and camping with his family; playing softball, which he did until his 80's, gardening; and taking part in Volkswalks with Verda, which they did in all 50 states.

Besides his parents, he was preceded in death by a granddaughter, Lori Day; a brother, C. LeRoy Day and a sister, Clarabelle Coulter.

Bill is survived by his wife of nearly 73 years, Verda Day; 4 sons, Russell (Ann) of Cumming, Georgia, David (Karen) of Boonville, Missouri, Steven (Vicki) of Shawnee, Kansas and Alvin (Dixie) of Ames, Iowa; 8 grandchildren; 19 great-grandchildren; a sister Katherine Day, Wilmington, North Carolina; other relatives and many close friends.